The effect of transient conditions on an equilibrium permafrost‐climate model
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Equilibrium permafrost models assume a stationary temperature and snow‐cover climate. With a variable or changing climate, short‐term energy imbalances between the active layer and permafrost result in transient departures from the equilibrium condition. This study examines the effects of such variability on an equilibrium permafrost‐climate model, the temperature at the top of permafrost (TTOP) model. Comparisons between numerical results and temperatures predicted by the TTOP‐model suggest that stationary inter‐annual variability introduces an error in the top‐of‐permafrost temperature obtained with the equilibrium model that is higher where permafrost temperature is close to 0°C, although multi‐year averaging reduces the error to 0.1°C or less. In the presence of a warming trend, the equilibrium model prediction tracked the changing top‐of‐permafrost temperature until permafrost temperatures reached 0°C, after which the equilibrium model produced significant errors. Errors up to 1°C were due to the temperature gradient through the developing talik, and depended on the warming rate, and the thickness of the talik. For all warming rates, the error was largest when the permafrost table was about 4 m below the surface, with the error declining as the permafrost table fell. Copyright © 2007 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".